Marilyn R. Marks speaks with volunteers as they count ballots during a hand review of voted ballots for the clerk and commissioner races of Saguache County in the Saguache Community Center last August.

We’re not sure why the Colorado Supreme Court changed its mind last week and decided it would not review a lower court ruling that voted ballots are public records, but we’re not complaining. By allowing the existing decision to stand, the high court has made a strong statement for transparent government and verifiable elections.

It’s too bad the legislature didn’t do the same in its recently concluded session. Although it did pass a law ensuring public access to voted ballots, that measure imposed a number of conditions on behalf of the convenience of elected county clerks. No less disturbing, lawmakers created a privileged class that includes candidates and representatives of issue committees who may inspect voted ballots during a blackout period when everyone else is excluded.

But at least given the high court’s decision, the issue of public access to voted ballots is largely settled. We say “largely” because the new law gives lots of discretion to clerks over which voted ballots to release and it remains to be seen whether some clerks abuse that latitude.

A strong statement? Yes, but consider the clerks’ behavior over the past year. When the appeals court ruling in September sided with former Aspen mayoral candidate Marilyn Marks, who had sued that city in order to review copies of voted ballots, the county clerks association promptly declared the sky was falling. The clerks accused the court of removing no less than the “curtain from our voting booths. Most Coloradans believe their votes should be a secret from their friends, coworkers and even spouses, but today’s ruling means Coloradans’ personal choices can be seen by anyone who asks.”

Their statement was a gross exaggeration, and the clerks themselves must have known it. After all, a few months later they ended up supporting the bill that affirms public access to voted ballots. Surely the clerks don’t believe it’s all right to lift “the curtain from our voting booths” so long as the legislature does it?

The controversy of the past year has been instructive in one unexpected respect: The clerks have revealed that a limited number of voted ballots are traceable because of the complex and peculiar manner that ballots are counted. Unfortunately, they seem to think that’s fine so long as no one actually traces them, when in fact the public has no way of knowing if such security is always present.

What the clerks should be doing is ensuring that all ballots are anonymous and untraceable. But since it is unclear they intend to do this, the tireless Marks has stepped in and filed another lawsuit with the goal of forcing them to do so. Given her track record, they should be worried.